MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379644294 · doi:10.1017/9781009089005.006

Informal Logic and Proof Strategies

2023· book-chapter· en· W4379644294 on OpenAlexaff
Shay Fuchs

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHistory and Theory of Mathematics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical proofCardinality (data modeling)Focus (optics)Mathematics educationPerspective (graphical)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Mathematical logicMathematical inductionMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emphasizing the creative nature of mathematics, this conversational textbook guides students through the process of discovering a proof. The material revolves around possible strategies to approaching a problem without classifying 'types of proofs' or providing proof templates. Instead, it helps students develop the thinking skills needed to tackle mathematics when there is no clear algorithm or recipe to follow. Beginning by discussing familiar and fundamental topics from a more theoretical perspective, the book moves on to inequalities, induction, relations, cardinality, and elementary number theory. The final supplementary chapters allow students to apply these strategies to the topics they will learn in future courses. With its focus on 'doing mathematics' through 200 worked examples, over 370 problems, illustrations, discussions, and minimal prerequisites, this course will be indispensable to first- and second-year students in mathematics, statistics, and computer science. Instructor resources include solutions to select problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicHistory and Theory of MathematicsFrench-language works237,207